Re: [Driu] [DNSOP] SRV and HTTP

["Patrik Fältström " <[e-mail]>]

On 11 Jul 2018, at 3:30, Mark Andrews wrote:

> I think there are three main objections.
>
> 1) Wildcards don’t work with prefixes.
> 2) Additional data isn’t always returned it may require multiple round trips.
> 3) Additional data processing doesn’t support negative responses.

4) Various libraries in PHP and ultimately lib curl do not include SRV in the resolution

5) New resource record types are very hard to implement (same argument as why we use TXT for SPF and not SPF for example)

6) You "only" change hostname with SRV and not a "complete change of the URL"

> All of these issues are trivially easy to fix.  It just require willingness to implement.
>
> 1) is addressed by defining a new type(s) rather than using prefixes.
> 2) is addressed by getting recursive servers to fill in missing additional data before returning.  Named has code in review for this for SRV as proof of concept.
> 3) is addressed by adding some signalling between the client and recursive server to indicate if the additional section is complete or not.

4) Is of course "just code" in lib curl and what not

5) Is like (4) but possibly harder if you want it implemented in PHP, javascript etc and not in the underlying libraries

6) This is why I came up with URI which is supposed to be a competitor to "well known URI"

   paf